Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • HOMO SAPIENS ARE PLENTIFUL BUT HUMANS ARE RARE Instead, if we abandon the falseh

    HOMO SAPIENS ARE PLENTIFUL BUT HUMANS ARE RARE

    Instead, if we abandon the falsehoods of the enlightenment, we find that we can dramatically reduce our conflicts, and dramatically reduce our frustration with much of mankind. At every 15 points of IQ we begin, and at every 30 points complete, speciation. And as far as I can tell, below 106, where man loses the ability to create and repair tools, and speak in his ideas in rational terms, we are merely talking about decreasingly domesticated homo sapiens, not ‘humans’ in the sense that we mean it: aware, conscious and self determinant independent of impulse. man cooperates using hierarchy because he must. while homo sapiens are plentiful, humans are all too rare.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-28 10:03:00 UTC

  • FWIW Russia’s Shoygu is a career engineer and politician. He just looks ferociou

    FWIW Russia’s Shoygu is a career engineer and politician. He just looks ferocious. He was given the position for political reasons. Not because he has military experience. He’s our equivalent of the head of the Department of Emergency Services (an engineering and logistics job).

    China’s Chang (patronym’s are stated first in China) is a career officer, but a career administrative officer, and not a warrior. He is in his position because china is in a period of expansion and he was previously in charge of acquisition and development of equipment.

    Iran’s Dehghan is a career air force officer with decades of military and intelligence experience. While not a ground-force commander he is battle tested, and holds his position out of demonstrated merit.

    There is no comparison to Mattis in this world. He is an example of the prussian continental and us marine american traditions. These are the two most stoic and empircal military traditions on earth. Unfortunately postwar moralism has polluted most of europe. We’d have to go back to germans of the world wars, or the germanic americans (patton, eisenhower, macarthur etc).

    This is why the interference of Clinton in the military must never be repeated. We need to replicate the marine culture in the army, separate the warriors from the technicians, give the warriors amazing retirement or injury benefits, and remove them from the technicians. We have to restore ‘arianism’ (roman/prussian stoicism) to our martial class and reposition the monarchy as the ward of that tradition stated clearly and without reservation in a constitution.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-28 09:34:00 UTC

  • Vi veri universum vivus vici “By the power of truth I, a mortal, have conquered

    Vi veri universum vivus vici

    “By the power of truth I, a mortal, have conquered all creation.”

    by force of truth, the universe, I mortal, have conquered

    (via Joel Davis)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 21:58:00 UTC

  • (value of being ill for decades was that all one can really do is consume inform

    (value of being ill for decades was that all one can really do is consume information. lol )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 16:12:00 UTC

  • ( Only a few people will understand this but I”m going to do the best I can in a

    ( Only a few people will understand this but I”m going to do the best I can in a small number of words ’cause I”m pretty busy writing code at the moment.)

    —“Münchhausen trilemma”—

    I think it’s nonsense. Since it is justificationary it’s nonsense. In modern terms we simply say that no set of operations can be used to define itself.

    But, like the liars paradox, this is a false dilemma. It is impossible to construct a liars paradox using complete sentences. (really)

    It is impossible to construct a question of the trilemma using complete sentences. It is also impossible to ask a question consisting of complete information other than stating a tautology.

    First, a proof consists of a test of internal consistency, not informational completeness, nor external correspondence. To construct a proof is not to demonstrate a truth. The truth lies in the promise that one’s proof is internally consistent. (really)

    Decidability is provided by willingness to act with partial information.

    Ergo his very question is a catastrophic error of reasoning by confusing closed axiomatic systems uttered verbally (an analogy) and therefore falsely, with open theoretic systems uttered as truthfully as possible given the universal sparsely distributed information that people must comprehend and act with.

    I don’t call these people liars and charlatans as much as idiots. But then, I am lucky to live in an era where we have enough experience with computability that we now understand how stupid all this victorian babble really is.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 16:04:00 UTC

  • LIBRARY AS THE REMAINING UNIVERSAL SACRED COMMONS? I understand now. A library i

    LIBRARY AS THE REMAINING UNIVERSAL SACRED COMMONS?

    I understand now. A library is the last sacred place in the commons. That is why we fund them so generously. Because, when judged by their content, they are nothing more than expensive book clubs for the underemployed.

    This isn’t so much a criticism of the over-investment in libraries nationwide. But that man demonstrates a consistent willingness over millennia to invest in sacred commons: a place where we may not speak, may not advocate, may not engage in commerce, may not compete. but merely rest in peace.

    Why is it then that we cannot simply return to the era when parks were sacred places? Surely we can have some parks sacred and some parks for play?

    I used to go to the (rather luxurious 19th century) graveyard. Graveyards still are a bit sacred. So how many sacred places do we have? is that why we hide in our homes? No sacred places in the commons? They have all been commercialized?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 15:48:00 UTC

  • A smart friend just reminded me how easy it is for smart folks to identify disti

    A smart friend just reminded me how easy it is for smart folks to identify distinctions without a difference.

    A question must propose a context.

    Those distinctions outside of the context are not differences.

    To conflate them is to impose your internal method of categorization upon the question rather than aswer the question with the properties that its decidabilty requires.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 15:43:00 UTC

  • THE FUNCTION OF A PHILOSOPHER The function of a philosopher is to identify and c

    THE FUNCTION OF A PHILOSOPHER

    The function of a philosopher is to identify and construct general rules of greater precision than the generation of philosophers that came before him – if he is lucky. Otherwise, if that previous generation was not less precise, but just wrong, then he has either to start from the generation before them, and so on, and so on, until some generation is no so much wrong, as imprecise. In our case it appears one has to go back quite a few. ‘Cause, at least, a whole lotta people got it a lot more wrong than right since the dawn of the scientific enlightenment. And if not for Poincare, Maxwell, Darwin, Spencer, Durkheim, Menger, Hayek, Nietzsche, the pre-raphelites and the romanticists, we’d have to rewind all the way back to Locke, Smith, Hume, and Jefferson. I mean. For the past few centuries, we’ve produced so called ‘philosophers’ by the box-car load. And I’m not sure they differ all that much from romance novelists, comic books, and slapstick playwrights. The pretense of wit – particularly with language – is a measure of the population willing to consume it. Popularity is not a measure of truth but of ignorance. Truth is complicated. Otherwise we wouldn’t need the few philosophers and scientists that succeed.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 15:39:00 UTC

  • “I need to learn how you think.”— I don’t feel when I think. I think with time

    —“I need to learn how you think.”—

    I don’t feel when I think. I think with time, property, costs, and reserve sympathetic judgement until the end. It’s just like math in that regard.

    Whenever I hear ‘feel good’ in an argument, I basically know someone is lying/making an err. So I solve the logic of incentives from A to B on that basis.

    When there are no ‘feelings’ involved I know I have found the waypoints. Then I stand back and ask myself how I feel about it. Most people simply cannot develop the mental discipline to think inversely like that.

    People are acquisition machines. Our feelings evolved encourage us to acquire. They evolved to reward us for thoughts of acquisition, acts of acquisition, acquisitions, and they evolved to punish us for losses and thoughts of losses. We merely make excuses along the way, because we need to negotiate with our ‘moral selves’ and negotiate with others.

    And that is perhaps the best way to look at “The Systems”

    System 0 – “acquire evaluation” (brainstem evaluation)

    System 1 – “moral evaluation”

    System 2 – “search” (memory of experiences)

    System 3 – “negotiation” (what we call reason)

    We just happen to be able to use our negotiation to reason – with enough practice to circumvent our moral evaluation.

    reasoning evolved from negotiation I assume.

    This explains (probably) the difference from male and female agency.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 14:41:00 UTC

  • “Sky Father”, Dyaus Pitar Zeus Pater Jupiter Odin God Truth Prometheus

    “Sky Father”,

    Dyaus Pitar

    Zeus Pater

    Jupiter

    Odin

    God

    Truth

    Prometheus

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 14:13:00 UTC